The appellant challenges the revocation of her probation, with the trial court finding that the appellant violated two conditions of the probation. As the appellant asserts, the evidence which the court considered was insufficient to establish the charged violation that the appellant moved from her residence without permission. But it is clear from the discussion below that the court would have revoked the probation and imposed the resulting sentence solely upon the other violation. The finding as to a violation for moving without permission is stricken, and the revocation order is otherwise affirmed. See Wilson v. State, 506 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Kane v. State, 473 So.2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).